DOCSLIB.ORG

Production, Opportunity Cost and Relative Price the Economic Problem

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Production, Opportunity Cost and Relative Price the Economic Problem Lecture 2 Production, Opportunity Cost and Relative Price Eric Doviak Principles of Microeconomics The Economic Problem x What will be produced? o Basic needs: food, clothing, shelter, etc. o Non-essentials: fish tanks, televisions, etc. o Capital goods: machinery, tools, human skills, etc. to produce more in the future x How will it be produced? o What resources are available? o How should labor and capital be allocated the production of each of the various products? x Who will get what is produced? o How should the products be allocated to the members of society – individuals, businesses, government, etc.? Page 23 Comparative Advantage This is one of the very few economic principles which is undeniably true, but is not obvious to intelligent people. x The US has a comparative advantage in the production of a good, if the opportunity cost of producing that good is lower in the US than it is in other countries. o Opportunity cost – how much of one good you have to give up in order to gain more of another. o Unit labor requirement – amount of labor 1hour hour needed to produce one unit of a good. Ex. If I 0.5 page type 2 pages of notes per hour, then my unit 2 pages labor requirement (to type one page) is half an hour per page. x Countries gain from trade, x if they specialize in producing the goods x in which they have a comparative advantage, x although there may be distributional effects to consider. Comparative Advantage x Colleen can cut 12 logs a day or gather 10 bushels of food a day x Bill can only cut 5 logs a day or gather 8 bushels a day Colleen’s opportunity cost Bill’s opportunity cost x of cutting logs: x of cutting logs: 1day 1day 12 logs 5 logs 10 bushels 0.83 bushels 8 bushels 1.6 bushels 1day 12 logs log 1day 5 logs log 10 bushels 8 bushels x of gathering food: x of gathering food: 1day 1day 12 logs logs 5 logs logs 10 bushels 1.2 8 bushels 0.625 1day 10 bushels bushel 1day 8 bushels bushel 12 logs 5 logs x Colleen has a comparative advantage in cutting logs because her opportunity cost of cutting logs is less than Bill’s. x Bill has a comparative advantage in gathering food because his opportunity cost of gathering food is less than Colleen’s. Page 24 x Colleen has a comparative advantage in cutting logs. x Bill has a comparative advantage in gathering food. x Colleen has an ABSOLUTE advantage in the production of BOTH goods, but she has a COMPARATIVE advantage in the production of only ONE good (cut logs). Relative Price x If Colleen and Bill valued logs and food equally, then they would trade logs for food at a one-to-one ratio. x If you prefer to think in terms of dollar values: o let the price of logs be one dollar per log: $1/log o let the price of food be one dollar per bushel: $1/bushel x so that: $1/log o the relative price of logs is one bushel per log: 1 bushel $1/bushel log log o the relative price of food is one log per bushel: $1/bushel 1 $1/log bushel Colleen’s Specialization Æ Cutting Logs x A person (country) should specialize in producing a good if its opportunity cost is less than the relative price of that good. o Colleen should specialize in logs because her opportunity cost of cutting logs is less than the relative price of logs. o By contrast, Bill should not cut logs because his opportunity cost of cutting logs is greater than the relative price of logs. Colleen's opp.cost of logs rel.price of logs Bill's opp.cost of logs 0.83 bushels 1 bushel 1.6 bushels log log log Colleen’s Gains from Trade x By specializing in cutting logs and trading her logs for food, Colleen gains more food (per day of work) than if she gathered food herself. 12 logs*1bushel 12 bushels ! 10 bushels 1day 1log 1day 1day Page 25 Bill’s Specialization Æ Gathering Food x A person (country) should specialize in producing a good if its opportunity cost is less than the relative price of that good. o Colleen should not gather food because her opportunity cost of gathering food is greater than the relative price of food. o By contrast, Bill should gather food because his opportunity cost of gathering food is greater than the relative price of food. Colleen's opp.cost of food rel.price of food Bill's opp.cost of food 1.2 logs ! 1 log ! 0.625 logs bushel bushel bushel Bill’s Gains from Trade x By specializing in gathering and trading his food for logs, Bill gains more logs (per day of work) than if he cut logs himself. 8 bushels* 1log 8 logs ! 5 logs 1day 1bushel 1day 1day Moral of the Story x Even though Colleen can produce both goods more efficiently, she gains by specializing in logs (the good in which she has a comparative advantage) and trading her logs for food with Bill. x Moral: America gains by trading with less developed countries. x Even though Bill is less efficient at producing both goods, he gains by specializing in food (the good in which he has a comparative advantage) and trading his food for logs with Colleen. x Moral: less developed countries gain by trading with America. Lower Productivity Æ Lower Wage x Recall the dollar prices of each good: $1/bushel and $1/log o Colleen produces 12 logs per day, so her wage is $12 per day. o Bill produces 8 bushels per day, so his wage is $8 per day. x This is why the Malaysians who made your sneakers, receive a much lower wage than you do. They’re less productive. Page 26 econ. data for 15 of the largest underdeveloped countries, 2001 GDP per Human Exports as Imports as country cap. at PPP Dev. Index % of GDP % of GDP Mexico $ 8,430 80.0 % 27.5 % 29.8 % Brazil $ 7,360 77.7 % 13.2 % 14.2 % Thailand $ 6,400 76.8 % 66.0 % 59.4 % Philippines $ 3,840 75.1 % 48.6 % 51.7 % Turkey $ 5,890 73.4 % 33.7 % 31.3 % China $ 4,020 72.1 % 25.5 % 23.1 % Iran $ 6,000 71.9 % 20.7 % 18.5 % Vietnam $ 2,070 68.8 % 54.6 % 57.0 % Indonesia $ 2,940 68.2 % 42.3 % 34.9 % Egypt $ 3,520 64.8 % 17.4 % 22.1 % India $ 2,840 59.0 % 13.5 % 14.1 % Bangladesh $ 1,610 50.2 % 15.4 % 21.5 % Pakistan $ 1,890 49.9 % 18.0 % 19.3 % Nigeria $ 850 46.3 % 43.3 % 34.4 % Ethiopia $ 810 35.9 % 15.1 % 29.8 % GDP per Human Exports as Imports as correlation matrix cap. at PPP Dev. Index % of GDP % of GDP GDP per cap. at PPP 1.000 Human Dev. Index 0.847 1.000 Exports as % of GDP 0.062 0.353 1.000 Imports as % of GDP –0.024 0.245 0.939 1.000 sources: World Development Indicators (2005); Human Development Report (2003) Trading Up x Of the countries in the table above, the ones which have the highest levels of human development, are generally the ones that engage in more international trade. x the Human Development Index is positively correlated with: o a country’s share of exports in GDP o a country’s share of imports in GDP x the correlations are not perfect, but they are significant moral of the story x Countries gain from trade, x if they specialize in producing the goods x in which they have a comparative advantage, x although there may be distributional effects to consider: o workers who are not working in the sector where the country has a comparative advantage will be adversely affected by free trade o ex. in America steel workers, textile workers and farmers are adversely affected by trade Page 27 Production Possibilities Frontier x PPF – all combinations of goods that can be produced if resources are used efficiently. One can produce at or below the PPF, but not above it. In one day, Colleen can: In one day, Bill can: x cut 12 logs or gather 10 bushels x cut 5 logs or gather 8 bushels x or produce a combination, such x or produce a combination, such as: 6 logs and 5 bushels. as: 2.5 logs and 4 bushels. Slope of the PPFs (above) is: –1*opp. cost of gathering food Gains from Trade log x Add a red line whose slope represents the relative price: 1 bushel If Colleen specializes in cutting logs: If Bill specializes in gathering food: x she can trade some of her logs for x he can trade some of his bushels bushels of food and of food for logs and x consume a combination that x consume a combination that exceeds any combination that she exceeds any combination that he could produce on her own. could produce on his own. Page 28 Production Function Quantity produced is a function of capital and labor: Q = f (K, L) x If you have one unit of kapital (for example, one stove in a kitchen), x and you keep increasing number of workers (labor) at that machine the quantity produced will increase x but at a decreasing rate Q = f (K, L) o because the workers start to get in each other’s way This production function is o “too many cooks in the kitchen” drawn for a fixed amount of capital.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BIS Working Papers No 136 the Price Level, Relative Prices and Economic Stability: Aspects of the Interwar Debate by David Laidler* Monetary and Economic Department
    BIS Working Papers No 136 The price level, relative prices and economic stability: aspects of the interwar debate by David Laidler* Monetary and Economic Department September 2003 * University of Western Ontario Abstract Recent financial instability has called into question the sufficiency of low inflation as a goal for monetary policy. This paper discusses interwar literature bearing on this question. It begins with theories of the cycle based on the quantity theory, and their policy prescription of price stability supported by lender of last resort activities in the event of crises, arguing that their neglect of fluctuations in investment was a weakness. Other approaches are then taken up, particularly Austrian theory, which stressed the banking system’s capacity to generate relative price distortions and forced saving. This theory was discredited by its association with nihilistic policy prescriptions during the Great Depression. Nevertheless, its core insights were worthwhile, and also played an important part in Robertson’s more eclectic account of the cycle. The latter, however, yielded activist policy prescriptions of a sort that were discredited in the postwar period. Whether these now need re-examination, or whether a low-inflation regime, in which the authorities stand ready to resort to vigorous monetary expansion in the aftermath of asset market problems, is adequate to maintain economic stability is still an open question. BIS Working Papers are written by members of the Monetary and Economic Department of the Bank for International Settlements, and from time to time by other economists, and are published by the Bank. The views expressed in them are those of their authors and not necessarily the views of the BIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Monetary Policy, Relative Prices and Inflation Rate: an Evaluation Based on New Keynesian Phillips Curve for the U.S
    Monetary policy, relative prices and inflation rate: an evaluation based on New Keynesian Phillips Curve for the U.S. economy Tito Belchior Silva Moreira* Department of economy, Catholic University of Brasilia, Brazil: [email protected] Mario Jorge C. Mendonça Department of economics, Institute for Applied Economic Research, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: [email protected] Adolfo Sachsida Department of economics, Institute for Applied Economic Research, Brasília, Brazil: [email protected] Paulo Roberto Amorim Loureiro Department of economics, University of Brasilia, Brasília, Brazil: [email protected] Abstract This paper investigates the direct impact of monetary policy on variation to the relative prices and, in turn, the direct effect of the change in relative prices on the inflation rate considering the New Keynesian Phillips Curve (NKPC). Thus, we analyze the indirect impact of the change of Federal Funds Rate on the inflation rate through the change in relative prices. We use GMM with instrumental variables to estimate several systems of two equations for the U.S. economy based on quarterly time-series from 1975 to 2015. The empirical results show that a change of the Funds Rate has a direct effect on change in relative prices and that, in turn, affects indirectly the inflation rate, through the change in relative prices. Hence, change in the relative prices affects directly the inflation rate via NKPC. In this context, variations of relative prices can be interpreted as a transmission channel of monetary policy. Furthermore, there are empirical evidences that the change of relative prices Granger-cause the inflation rate. Key words: Monetary policy, relative prices, inflation rate, NKPC, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ricardian Model
    Chapter 3 Labor Productivity and Comparative Advantage: The Ricardian Model Copyright © 2012 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. Preview • Opportunity costs and comparative advantage • Production possibilities • Relative supply, relative demand & relative prices • Trade possibilities and gains from trade • Wages and trade • Misconceptions about comparative advantage • Transportation costs and non-traded goods • Empirical evidence Copyright © 2012 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. 3-2 Introduction • Sources of differences across countries that lead to gains from trade: – The Ricardian model (Chapter 3) examines differences in the productivity of labor (due to differences in technology) between countries. – The Heckscher-Ohlin model (Chapter 5) examines differences in labor, labor skills, physical capital, land, or other factors of production between countries. Copyright © 2012 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. 3-3 Ricardian Model Assumptions 1. Two countries: domestic and foreign. 2. Two goods: wine and cheese. 3. Labor is the only resource needed for production. 4. Labor productivity is constant. 5. Labor productivity varies across countries due to differences in technology. 6. The supply of labor in each country is constant. 7. Labor markets are competitive. 8. Workers are mobile across sectors. Copyright © 2012 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. 3-4 Comparative Advantage • Suppose that the domestic country has a comparative advantage in cheese production: its opportunity cost of producing cheese is lower than in the foreign country. * * aLC /aLW < a LC /a LW When the domestic country increases cheese production, it reduces wine production less than the foreign country does because the domestic unit labor requirement of cheese production is low compared to that of wine production.
    [Show full text]
  • On Using Relative Prices to Measure Capital-Specific Technological
    FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO WORKING PAPER SERIES On Using Relative Prices to Measure Capital-Specific Technological Progress Milton Marquis Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Florida State University and Bharat Trehan Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco March 2005 Working Paper 2005-02 http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/papers/2005/wp05-02bk.pdf The views in this paper are solely the responsibility of the authors and should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. On Using Relative Prices to Measure Capital-Specific Technological Progress Milton Marquis∗ Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Florida State University and Bharat Trehan∗∗ Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco March 2005 Abstract Recently, Greenwood, Hercowitz and Krusell (GHK) have identified the rela- tive price of (new) capital with capital-specific technological progress. In a two- sector growth model, however, the relative price of capital equals the ratio of the productivity processes in the two sectors. Restrictions from this model are used with data on wages and prices to construct measures of productivity growth and test the GHK identification, which is easily rejected by the data. This raises ques- tions about various measures of the contribution that capital-specific technological progress might make to the economy. This identification also induces a negative correlation between the resulting measures of capital-specific and economy-wide technological change, which potentially explains why papers employing this iden- tification find that capital-specific technological change accelerated in the mid- 1970s.
    [Show full text]
  • Money, Interest and Inflation Chapter 28 C H a P T E R C H E C K L I S T When You Have Completed Your Study of This Chapter, You Will Be Able To
    Money, Interest and Inflation Chapter 28 C H A P T E R C H E C K L I S T When you have completed your study of this chapter, you will be able to 1 Explain what determines the demand for money and how the demand for money and the supply of money determine the nominal interest rate. 2 Explain how in the long run, the quantity of money determines the price level and money growth brings inflation. 3 Identify the costs of inflation and the benefits of a stable value of money. WHERE WE ARE; WHERE WE’RE HEADING < The Real Economy Real factors that are independent of the price level determine real GDP, the natural unemployment rate. Investment and saving determine the real interest rate and, along with population growth and technological change, determine the growth rate of real GDP. <The Money Economy Money is created by banks and its quantity is controlled by the Fed. WHERE WE ARE; WHERE WE’RE HEADING <The Money Economy The effects of money can be best understood in three steps: • The effects of the Fed’s actions on the short-term nominal interest rate • The long-run effects of the Fed’s actions on the price level and the inflation rate • The details between the short-run and long-run effects 28.1 MONEY AND THE INTEREST RATE < The Demand for Money Quantity of money demanded The inventory of money that households and firms choose to hold. Benefit of Holding Money The benefit of holding money is the ability to make payments.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Evaluation Glossary of Terms
    Economic Evaluation Glossary of Terms A Attributable fraction: indirect health expenditures associated with a given diagnosis through other diseases or conditions (Prevented fraction: indicates the proportion of an outcome averted by the presence of an exposure that decreases the likelihood of the outcome; indicates the number or proportion of an outcome prevented by the “exposure”) Average cost: total resource cost, including all support and overhead costs, divided by the total units of output B Benefit-cost analysis (BCA): (or cost-benefit analysis) a type of economic analysis in which all costs and benefits are converted into monetary (dollar) values and results are expressed as either the net present value or the dollars of benefits per dollars expended Benefit-cost ratio: a mathematical comparison of the benefits divided by the costs of a project or intervention. When the benefit-cost ratio is greater than 1, benefits exceed costs C Comorbidity: presence of one or more serious conditions in addition to the primary disease or disorder Cost analysis: the process of estimating the cost of prevention activities; also called cost identification, programmatic cost analysis, cost outcome analysis, cost minimization analysis, or cost consequence analysis Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA): an economic analysis in which all costs are related to a single, common effect. Results are usually stated as additional cost expended per additional health outcome achieved. Results can be categorized as average cost-effectiveness, marginal cost-effectiveness,
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Microeconomics LESSON 2 ACTIVITY 2 Key Scarcity, Opportunity Cost and Production Possibilities Curves
    UNIT Answer I 1 Microeconomics LESSON 2 ACTIVITY 2 Key Scarcity, Opportunity Cost and Production Possibilities Curves Scarcity necessitates choice. Consuming or producing more of one thing means consuming or pro- ducing less of something else. The opportunity cost of using scarce resources for one thing instead of something else is often represented in graphical form as a production possibilities curve. Part A Use Figures 2.1 and 2.2 to answer these questions. Write the correct answer on the answer blanks, or underline the correct answer in parentheses. Figure 2.1 Production Possibilities Curve 1 12 10 8 6 GOOD B 4 2 031 2 456 GOOD A 1. If the economy represented by Figure 2.1 is presently producing 12 units of Good B and zero units of Good A: (A) The opportunity cost of increasing production of Good A from zero units to one unit is the loss of two unit(s) of Good B. (B) The opportunity cost of increasing production of Good A from one unit to two units is the loss of two unit(s) of Good B. (C) The opportunity cost of increasing production of Good A from two units to three units is the loss of two unit(s) of Good B. (D) This is an example of (constant / increasing / decreasing / zero) opportunity cost per unit for Good A. Advanced Placement Economics Teacher Resource Manual © National Council on Economic Education, New York, N.Y. 17 UNIT Answer I 1 Microeconomics LESSON 2 ACTIVITY 2 Key Part B Use the axes in Figures 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 to draw the type of curve that illustrates the label above each axis.
    [Show full text]
  • Oecd Development Centre
    OECD DEVELOPMENT CENTRE Working Paper No. 16 (Formerly Technical Paper No. 16) COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE: THEORY AND APPLICATION TO DEVELOPING COUNTRY AGRICULTURE by Ian Goldin Research programme on: Changing Comparative Advantage in Food and Agriculture June 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY . 9 PREFACE . 11 INTRODUCTION . 13 PART ONE . 14 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE: THE THEORY . 14 The Theory of Comparative Advantage . 14 Testing the theory . 15 The Theory and Agriculture . 16 PART TWO . 19 COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: THE PRACTICE . 19 Costs and Prices . 19 Land, Labour and Capital . 20 Joint Products . 22 Cost Studies . 22 Engineering Cost Studies . 23 Revealed Comparative Advantage . 25 Trade Liberalisation Simulations . 26 Domestic Resource Cost Analysis . 29 PART THREE . 32 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND DEVELOPING COUNTRY AGRICULTURE . 32 Comparative Advantage and Economic Growth . 32 Conclusion . 33 NOTES . 35 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES . 36 7 SUMMARY This paper investigates the application of the principle of comparative advantage to policy analysis and policy formulation. It is concerned with both the theory and the measurement of comparative advantage. Despite its central role in economics, the theory is found to be at an impasse, with its usefulness confined mainly to the illustration of economic principles which in practice are not borne out by the evidence. The considerable methodological problems associated with the measurement of comparative advantage are highlighted in the paper. Attempts to derive indicators of comparative advantage, such as those associated with "revealed comparative advantage", "direct resource cost", "production cost" and "trade liberalisation" studies are reviewed. These methods are enlightening, but are unable to provide general perspectives which allow an analysis of dynamic comparative advantage.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunity Cost and Explain Why Accounting Profits and Economic Profits Are Not the Same.”
    Microeconomics Topic 1: “Explain the concept of opportunity cost and explain why accounting profits and economic profits are not the same.” Reference: Gregory Mankiw’s Principles of Microeconomics, 2nd edition, Chapter 1 (p. 3-6) and Chapter 13 (p. 270-2). Scarcity Economics is the study of how people make choices under scarcity. What is scarcity? Scarcity means that resources are limited. There are not enough resources available to satisfy everyone’s wants. This is clearly true for individuals. Your income is limited. You cannot buy everything you want, so you must choose between different alternatives. Your time is also limited. You cannot do everything you want to, so you are forced to choose between different alternatives. If you choose to spend the day at the beach, you give up going to class or working. Opportunity Cost This concept of scarcity leads to the idea of opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of an action is what you must give up when you make that choice. Another way to say this is: it is the value of the next best opportunity. Opportunity cost is a direct implication of scarcity. People have to choose between different alternatives when deciding how to spend their money and their time. Milton Friedman, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics, is fond of saying "there is no such thing as a free lunch." What that means is that in a world of scarcity, everything has an opportunity cost. There is always a trade-off involved in any decision you make. The concept of opportunity cost is one of the most important ideas in economics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Limit-Price Dynamics - Uniqueness, Computability and Comparative Dynamics in Competitiive Markets Gaël Giraud
    The Limit-Price Dynamics - Uniqueness, Computability and Comparative Dynamics in Competitiive Markets Gaël Giraud To cite this version: Gaël Giraud. The Limit-Price Dynamics - Uniqueness, Computability and Comparative Dynamics in Competitiive Markets. 2007. halshs-00155709 HAL Id: halshs-00155709 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00155709 Submitted on 19 Jun 2007 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Documents de Travail du Centre d’Economie de la Sorbonne The Limit-Price Dynamics — Uniqueness, Computability and Comparative Dynamics in Competitive Markets Gaël GIRAUD 2007.20 Maison des Sciences Économiques, 106-112 boulevard de L'Hôpital, 75647 Paris Cedex 13 http://ces.univ-paris1.fr/cesdp/CES-docs.htm ISSN : 1955-611X The Limit-Price Dynamics | Uniqueness, Computability, and Comparative Dynamics in Competitive Markets GaÄelGiraud1), 2)¤ 1) Paris School of economics, CNRS 2) Universit¶eParis-1 Panth¶eon-Sorbonne [email protected] April 30, 2007 Abstract.| In this paper, a continuous-time price-quantity trading process is de¯ned for exchange economies with di®erentiable characteristics. The dynamics is based on boundedly rational agents exchanging limit-price orders to a central clearing house, which rations in¯nitesimal trades according to Mertens (2003) double auction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law of One Price Without the Border: the Role of Distance Versus Sticky Prices
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE LAW OF ONE PRICE WITHOUT THE BORDER: THE ROLE OF DISTANCE VERSUS STICKY PRICES Mario J. Crucini Mototsugu Shintani Takayuki Tsuruga Working Paper 14835 http://www.nber.org/papers/w14835 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 April 2009 We are indebted to Chikako Baba, Paul Evans and Masao Ogaki for valuable comments on the earlier draft. We also thank seminar participants at Hitotsubashi, Osaka, Queen's, and Tohoku University and Bank of Canada and Bank of Japan for helpful comments and discussions. Mario J. Crucini and Mototsugu Shintani gratefully acknowledge the financial support of National Science Foundation (SES-0136979, SES-0524868). Takayuki Tsuruga gratefully acknowledges the financial support of Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research. The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2009 by Mario J. Crucini, Mototsugu Shintani, and Takayuki Tsuruga. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. The Law of One Price Without the Border: The Role of Distance Versus Sticky Prices Mario J. Crucini, Mototsugu Shintani, and Takayuki Tsuruga NBER Working Paper No. 14835 April 2009 JEL No. D4,F40,F41 ABSTRACT We examine the role of nominal price rigidities in explaining the deviations from the Law of One Price (LOP) across cities in Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunity Costs and the Economist’S View: a Response to “The Economist’S Fallacy”
    http://www.jmde.com/ Commentary Understanding Opportunity Costs and the Economist’s View: A Response to “The Economist’s Fallacy” Brad R. Watts Western Michigan University f course, the concept of opportunity costs wheat bread as being the $2.50 they hand over O has generally remained in the domain of to the cashier at the grocery store. Instead, economists and its understanding and economists are concerned with efficient use of acceptance are not universal in other fields, resources, which means that cost should be including evaluation. Indeed, in the last issue of considered in light of what could have the Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation (JMDE), otherwise been obtained with the same resource Michael Scriven spoke out against the use of expenditure—in this case perhaps the oatmeal opportunity costs in evaluation. Unfortunately, bread, or tortillas, or other product that you what may appear to Scriven to be flaws of logic could have put your limited resources toward if and utility in the economists’ concept of cost you had not decided on getting the whole wheat are the result of some common bread. misunderstandings about what a “cost” is—at On the surface this may seem trivial since, least in terms of how economists use the term. after all, we obviously prefer the wheat bread However, I believe that the points raised by and many of us could easily afford to purchase Scriven can be either corrected or clarified in a both the loaf of wheat bread and the tortillas. way that will illustrate why opportunity costs are However, as the situation grows more a useful and important concept for evaluators.
    [Show full text]